Communism's Smile

Connotation can sometimes obliterate any chance of a concept’s positive sides.  Take a basic example, when a homework assignment is called “difficult,” students are less likely to put forward an effort if they think that the work will be too “difficult.”  The instructor would typically call the assignment “challenging,” which instead says that students can solve the problems if they put in some work, and that the result of further understanding will be rewarding.  A simple little trick, that communism suffers from.  As we discussed in class earlier in the semester, in the U.S., running for President as a communist is comparable to running as an arsonist.  The difference:  one has a political viewpoint with a negative connotation, and the other burns buildings.  While indeed the President will publicly be neither of those, the basis of communism as a means to social order bears no threatening attributes, and casting out all aspects of an ideal simply because it is the opposite of one’s way of life is an argument that slavery should still exist because we are used to slaves.  I am not arguing that we should become a communist nation, but merely that communism has reasonable arguments.

For the sake of acknowledging connotation, let’s imagine bread pudding.  To bake the most delicious of all bread pudding, the almighty pudding of the Gods, there cannot be an imbalance in the volume of pudding versus the volume of bread.  While pudding provides the flavor, bread provides the texture that is essential to this delicacy, and yet the bread is often overlooked.  When there is an excess of pudding, the dessert will be mushy, and go completely to waste.  Now there is only a mess of pudding sitting in a refrigerator that no one wants to eat, it will go to waste.  If the chef would have simply found the proper balance, the bread would not be suppressed, and the pudding would be delicious for all to enjoy.  Of course, there are other ingredients that are necessary as well, and to make the perfect bread pudding, all one can do is experiment with these ideas until a synthesis is achieved.  Perhaps it is even the case that the perfect dessert is impossible to achieve, since indeed it is up to the taste buds of the consumer to determine what they enjoy.

What did I just say? Take an idea, and assume it to be almighty like pudding, and forget about what else is needed for a good mix.  Chances are the results will not be very good if we try to create a government based entirely around the power of one individual, all flavor with no substance.  Likewise, if we base a government with no leadership, all for the people with all substance and no flavor, then we have bread rather than bread pudding.  I admit that I enjoy bread, but it gets old quick and could always use a little more oomph.  Like any idea, communism would not exist if someone did not have a justification for its benefits.  Just as behind capitalism’s smile, and any idealism, there are hidden problems in communism’s toothy grin of social order.  Someone please name for me an idealism where the obvious benefits are not layered with human error.